Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 992 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 68 - unexplained Cash credit - HELD THAT:- The assessee could not explain as to reasons for the said creditor to have extended interest free unsecured loans . The assessee also did not explained as to when these loans were finally paid off/squared by the assessee. CIT(A) merely accepted confirmation filed by the assessee and did not made any enquiry/verification himself to come to conclusion whether all the ingredients of Section 68 were satisfied cumulatively. Powers of ld. CIT(A) are co-terminus with powers of the AO. In our considered view, the assessee has not fully discharged its onus u/s 68 completely and cumulatively as to all the three ingredients and in our considered view , this matter need to be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication wherein one more opportunity is granted to the assessee to adduce evidences to substantiate satisfaction of all the three ingredients of Section 68. The assessee is directed to file necessary evidences before the AO in set aside proceedings to discharge its onus/burden as is cast u/s 68 - AO is directed to give proper and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee in denovo assessment proceedings. Bogus purchases - AO made additions to the tune of 100% of aforesaid alleged bogus purchases to the income of the assessee - HELD THAT:- The incriminating information was received from Sales Tax Department as well Investigation Wing, Mumbai that these parties are indulging in issuing bogus purchases invoices without supplying any material physically wherein these parties have deposed before Maharashtra Sales Tax Authorities that they are indulging in issuing bogus invoices and the assessee is stated to be beneficiary of these alleged bogus purchases. The assessee could not produce these parties before AO as well learned CIT(A) for verification, enquiry and recording of their statement . The notices issued u/s 133(6) by the AO to these parties for verification returned unserved. The proof of transportation and delivery of the material was not filed by the assessee. The consumption/utilisation details of the material is also not filed. In this case, the material under these invoices was intended to be utilised for executing contracts with Municipalities of Greater Mumbai / Thane by assessee as sub-contractor. The onus was very heavy on assessee to prove consumption/utilisation of material, which it could not discharge as no consumption/utilisation details were furnished. Appellate order passed by learned CIT(A) cannot be upheld/sustained and we set aside the appellate order passed by learned CIT(A) and upheld/sustain the assessment order passed by the AO as it is a fit case for sustaining additions to the tune of 100% of alleged bogus purchases - Decided in favour of revenue
|